PSA Grading EXPOSED! Pokemon Card Population Control?
āļāļąāļ
- āđāļāļĒāđāļāļĢāđāđāļĄāļ·āđāļ 8 āļ.āļ. 2025
- ðORIGINAL VIDEO: âĒ The TRUTH about PSA GR...
ðMy eBay Store: www.ebay.com/s... (Affiliate Link)
When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
PSA GRADING EXPOSED! POKEMON CARD POPULATION CONTROL?
Grading your Pokemon cards is the best way to increase their value while also protecting them from potential damage. However, some have speculated that PSA is actively engaged in "population control" or the suppressing PSA 10's. Today, we'll analyze PSA population data to see if there is any truth to this claim.
Thanks for watching,
Pokemon Classics
*Music Provided by Game Chops: gamechops.com/...
*Produced by Mikel and Mastered by Dj CUTMAN
*Note: These are merely my observations and not to be taken as financial advice or investing strategy. Always do your research before making any purchases.
â CARD PROTECTION (Affiliate Links)
âūUltraPro Sleeves (Amazon): amzn.to/3u0WWYY
âūUltraPro Toploaders (Amazon): amzn.to/4fOB0qh
âūBCW Toploaders (Amazon): amzn.to/4eQl9WN
âūCard Savers I (Amazon): amzn.to/3OAsPBG
âūUltraPro Pikachu Binder (Amazon): amzn.to/4g5fvB2
âūVaultX Binder (Amazon): amzn.to/4g5fvB2
âūVaultX 480 Binder (Amazon): amzn.to/3ST8knd
â CARD STORAGE & DISPLAY (Affiliate Links)
âūAcrylic Easel Stands (Amazon): amzn.to/3pIHP82
âūAcrylic Risers (Amazon): amzn.to/31SVcWG
âū36 Card Display Case (Amazon): amzn.to/3UmTtih
âūGraded Guards (Amazon): amzn.to/4i4u4Hb
âūJersey Display Case (Amazon): amzn.to/4bLeEms
âūSnorlax Plush (Amazon): amzn.to/4g9mclP
âūMew Plush (Amazon): amzn.to/4fRop5C
âūPikach/Eevee Plush (Amazon): amzn.to/3Y0MsZR
â CARD BUSINESS ITEMS (Affiliate Links)
âūMonster Storage Box (Amazon):amzn.to/3W3KQff
âūToploader Storage Box (Amazon): amzn.to/49cICjH
âūGraded Card Storage Box (Amazon): amzn.to/3ItmVyB
âūDry Erase Labels (Amazon): amzn.to/43kLUwH
âūColored Dividers (Amazon): amzn.to/43l8LZd
âūBCW Sorting Tray (Amazon): amzn.to/4bIB481
âūPerfect Fit PSA Sleeves (Amazon): amzn.to/3EE0mpn
âūUltra Pro PSA Sleeves: amzn.to/3NUKqE2
âū250 Bubble Mailers: amzn.to/4gdJIOF
â ELECTRONICS CARD BUSINESS (Affiliate Links)
âūRollo Thermal Printer (Amazon): amzn.to/3Oyo7EK
âūPhotography Light Box (Amazon): amzn.to/3gzm6L0
âūRotating Display Stand (Amazon): amzn.to/4f9rf4Z
âūNeewer LED Light (Amazon): amzn.to/3ZrBHQC
âūSony ZV-E10 Camera (Amazon): amzn.to/4cL58kW
âūElgato Cam Link (Amazon): amzn.to/3zM9EB2
âūElgato Prompter (Amazon): amzn.to/3Oycduo
âūElgato Green Screen (Amazon): amzn.to/3Ln4RZk
#pokemoncards #PokemonNews #pokemon #pokemoninvesting #pokemonpsa #pokemontcg #pokemon2025 #psagrading
![HUGE $6000 PSA Pokemon Return: How to Pre-grade Your Cards! [Grading Tips & Tricks]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/GLas2p98hZM/mqdefault.jpg)
ORIGINAL VIDEO HERE: th-cam.com/video/rL4yb0NqJmw/w-d-xo.html
People ran out of charizard's to get graded, what's the most expensive cards to get graded. That's what we are seeing
Don't buy the grade buy the card you want to collect. Either a card is a 10 or a 9 or not they shouldn't control anything.
Another thing to note, some cards could be resubmissions of existing cards within the population.
A PSA 10 could have been cracked and submitted to BGS hoping for a black label, wasn't successful than resubmitted to PSA.
Not likely a super common occurrence, but its not zero.
Thing to also look at are "pack fresh" cards that are getting older and older, which means more time the cards inside get moved around, causing some damage over time.(while inside the pack)
That's true. Most of the damage to vintage pack-fresh cards though is manufacturing-related. Poor quality control and a rush to print to demand in an era when technology was inferior and WOTC was still figuring out their process. That's also why there were so many error cards in early WOTC . . . rushed production = reduced quality.
PSA appears to be harsher on print lines compared to whitening and edge silvering. Which I would like to see it be the opposite!
I think it's like you said. The higher the vintage cards value is, the more likely they will be extra tough on it. The higher the value, the less likely for a 10 in my opinion. Wonder how many psa base set Charizard 10's were added during that period? Would be interesting to see the list with the most valuable cards from each set, not the hardest to grade.
That's a great idea! Perhaps, I will do another video at some point with this as the focus. Just looking quickly, I can tell you that the Base Charizard went from 447 to 485 during this span, an 8.5% increase in population.
@@pokemon_classics Thanks for that info. I appreciate you looking :) I hope you do make that video. I will be watching it to see the results for sure. Cheers
I donât think the total increased quantity of 10âs is an accurate metric for the argument. How about the âgraded 10â percentage of total submitted cards of that name VS time periods represented. I understand, and might agree with the logical argument made, but I think the math just doesnât represent that argument. I do appreciate you, and your analysis! Great content
Add to that total pop increase weighted by % expecting to get a 10 so increase of 7-9's over time vs 10's would be a good metric. The reason i include 7 is because sometimes there's a small dent someone missed and that instantly makes a card a 7 in PSA.
That's a fair point and one that I have been trying to pursue. However, I only have total submitted data for some of these cards from a few random intervals . . . ones I've been personally tracking. I'm not sure that data is available anywhere (but I'm looking). My point was to show that PSA is still giving 10's on these cards . . . they didn't just stop giving 10's. However, I too am curious to know how much the Gem Rates have changed over time. Though, even that is nuanced.
Anything below a PSA 9 lost money prior to 2016; since then, PSA 7's and 8's have become profitable. It's complicated, but I agree that tracking Gem Rates over time would be more relevant.
@ Yeah, it will be impossible to get good metrics for all of the variables needed to get, letâs say proof, of this one way or the other. I havenât done any serious research on the topic myself. But, I can imagine that there are only specific datasets allowed to the public, making it even more difficult. Thinking of how to calculate how people pursue grading, took care of cards over time, etc. are almost impossible to quantify. I think you do a great job presenting as much data as possible with thoughtful analysis. Iâm just giving my 2 cents to a wide discussion. Thanks!
Card cleaning has increased the population of many vintage cards especially cards that are known with print lines adding a layer of wax on the card to hide the print lines
I've also wondered about that . . . to what extent is card cleaning impacting populations. I have zero data to support or defeat this claim, but it is an interesting consideration.
Grading is a scam. Started off as a good idea but now its trash. In a few years a computer/AI will grade your cards for like $3-5 and fix this issue.
I hope PSA utilizes AI scanners in the future kind of like TAG does. It would help prevent Human Error grades.
I think they both should be used . . . checks and balances.
Idk, it all depends on what they learn on. Arena Club also uses AI scanners for grading and Iâve seen a few of their centering 10âs that were WAYYYYY off.
thoughts on AOG? they use AI assistance
I notice neo genesis isn't as popular of a set too. Its such a shame cause it has some really sick art for vintage. Typhlosions arts are especially dope imo
The Neo sets are my favorites, but they were produced when Pokemon was losing popularity and had much, much smaller print runs then the earlier WOTC sets.
@@pokemon_classics ah okay. I guess that kinda makes sense then. Didn't know much in terms of the history of the tcg. Thanks for the info
I like the video, I just have a question about the data. You say over the past 2 years these cards have seen an average increase of 18%. I am just wondering how many of each of these cards were submitted? I think that is where people are starting to question PSA. Letâs say 1000 Lugias were submitted but only 5 were 10âs during the 2 year period. That means only .5% come back as 10âs. I find that hard to believe with people pulling more of these fresh from packs.
That is a great question and one that I've been trying to find. Besides a few cards that I've been personally tracking and can go back and look at screenshots of population data, I'm not sure the total submitted at different points in time is available anywhere. My point was to demonstrate that PSA hasn't just stopped giving out 10's . . . they still are, regularly. However, I'm also curious about the overall rate of 10's over time.
@ I agree. I donât think they are not going to give a ten, but I am curious on the over all quality that goes through for these cards. I might have to look and see if I can figure out how many were submitted during that time.
@@ericcornelius5685 If you find a website or resource that archives total submission data at different points, would you mind sharing it with me?
I figure the most relevant submissions are 8s and 9s because those are primarily the ones that would be in 10 contention. Could you take the population increase in PSA 10s from 2022-2024, the PSA 8s and 9s population increase from 2022-2024 and then compare it to the PSA 10s increase and PSA 8/9 increase from a different 2 year time period? If the percent of all 3 increased roughly the same in both two year time periods maybe nothing, but if the percent increase in 8/9 is much higher that would likely indicate more submissions? Or does the website you used to pull PSA 10 population increases not include lower grades?
@@pokemon_classics if I find anything I will let you know.
I scrutinize every card I submit to psa. On so many occasions I've had psa 9 quality cards grade 10. I've had for sure 10's grade 8 & 9. It just depends on how they feel. Then sometimes I feel that the grader might have the card in a 10, of the same card I sent in to grade. So the grader gives my card an 8 or 9 to control the population on their card. I feel like non human grading can fix that issue. Humans make alot of mistakes also. I'm fed up having to Crack my 9s that should of graded 10.
So true in my opinion
These graders are mostly minimum wage employees . . . I doubt they are collectors of high value cards secretly working against you. I do agree though that an infusion of AI technology (assess centering and edges) would help with the inconsistency from grader to grader, which is inevitable with (low-pay, high-volume) human labor.
I have a 10 Giratina and Lugia alt that are both visibly off center. Iâve resent my Charizard alt thatâs flawless 3 times and itâs got a 9 every time. Itâs odd
Thatâs why TAG takes out a large portion of human grading out of the equation. Itâs extremely detailed on the grade it gave that card. Itâs also impossible to crack and resubmit the same card with their fingerprint technology. Look into it.
@@pokemon_classicsTAG does this
I feel bad for anyone holding 2x or 4x, 5x certs of vintage psa 9, 10's. Half of those cards would be lucky to get a psa 7 today
Honestly I donât think itâs a conspiracy. I think itâs mainly a result of them grading SO many modern cards with higher quality, they have have unknowingly been biased to expect greater quality from vintage over time. I think this is especially seen with PSA 9âs. Many in the 5X cert and lower have a lot more corner or edge wear than most psa 8âs today. I think if many of those certs were cracked and sent in today they would get 7âs and 8âs. And I doubt PSA changes their standard. I just think itâs a function of having all these graders spending more time grading higher quality newer cards leading to way too high of expectations for vintage cards. Just my $0.02
Also keep in mind, over the past few years PSA has expanded aggressively. Thatâs tons of new graders working for them. And I have a hunch new graders are probably on average going to be more harsh with those vintage cards since they lack the history and experience from a decade ago.
There's no way to quantify this, but I suspect you're right. Psychologically, it would be hard to not be influenced by the superior condition of modern, especially considering that modern now makes such an overwhelming majority of cards submitted for grading.
Great video, thanks for the analysis!
I don't grade so I really have no skin in the game but just from the outside looking in, I'd say the biggest reason PSA would grade cards lesser than what they deserve is that they hope people will crack slabs and resubmit. A point that you're touching upon as I'm typing this, haha. The resubmission doesn't have to be the original submitter, so the cost doesn't necessarily fall upon the same person, thus the cost aspect to resubmit is kind of a non-issue.
We'll never know, tho. Even if an ex PSA employee comes out and spills the beans, it may be a biased take on the whole process, somewhat dependent on the terms they left the company.
I graded a slowking thismpast year. Whole card was mint except for a few scratches on holo. Sent charizards in worse condition and got 7s. The slowking got a 5!
I appreciate the content but the math doesn't seem right here. You can't look at the percentage increase of PSA10's over that time period in a vacuum and make a conclusion either way. You have to compare the rate of increase in 10s against total submissions across previous years. Presenting the figure of 18.2 over 2.5 years is also a little misleading. That's annualized average of 6.9% which feels small relative to how many more submissions PSA receives now
I agree, but (to the best of my knowledge) there is no way to track submission volume over time . . . I've been looking all-over for such data! The point was to show that PSA 10's haven't just stopped, which was a prevalent (and inaccurate) counter-claim many were arguing after my previous video. Even the most difficult to grade cards are still seeing new 10's enter the population report, and an average increase of 18.2% over 2.5 years seems reasonable. Keep in mind, many of these cards had single digit populations in 2017, even after the Pokemon Go boom. I agree though . . .it would be nice to know how Gem Rates have changed over the years. That would be a much better metric.
Maybe because more people are sending in their cards now?
That's a fair point. I'm not sure there is data available that shows the total amount of cards submitted at various points to determine the change in Gem Rate over time . . . that would be awesome. However, my point is that PSA hasn't just stopped giving out 10's or is secretly conspiring to thwart population growth. Clearly, populations are still growing, even for the most difficult cards to grade.
@ I hear you
Great video
It would have been interesting to see the variation of the total number of cards grades for each of them, and comparing the proportion of PSA10 before and after for each of them, instead of just looking at the increase of PSA 10 count
I agree, but (to the best of my knowledge) there is no way to track submission volume over time . . . I've been looking all-over for such data! The point was to show that PSA 10's haven't just stopped, which was a prevalent (and inaccurate) counter-claim many were arguing after my previous video.
â@@pokemon_classics I think I have a bigger issue not knowing the sub grades and the detail via a map of the issues of the cards like it can be done elsewhere.
This in itself should reduce by a good amount the criticism over any gradation company, avoiding to regrade a card, ...
I may grade PSA one day when they are implemented in Europe (in Germany I heard rumors, but I don't know much) but for now I'm focusing on other companies that do not bring as much value to the card as PSA but are closer to me geographically.
I buy PSA 8's like some sort of degenerate.
This is the way ðŦĄ
Honestly, PSA 8's are a great value . . . sometimes even cheaper than raw near mint copies. If I was just starting out, that's what I would do too.
@@pokemon_classics that was my thought as well especially when it comes to vintage. Given the cost of a pack + grading fees. I'll buy 8's all day and build a nice collection.
@@BeezerBarkhouse The quality difference between a PSA 8 and PSA 10 is also so negligible, that I don't think it's worth chasing labels for most people. I'm chasing 10 sets, but only because I started long before it got insanely expensive.
Some people get offended if you criticize PSA grading because donât want to devalue their existing cards. Imagine if PSA became known as unreliable mainstream? That means buyers may not buy from PSA graded cards.
Iâm glad though because I havenât graded cards yet because of the wonkiness of the way itâs done. Itâs a pretty scammy third party (arguable sidelined man in the middle).
Oh, there is plenty to criticize PSA for . . . this specific criticism though (population control), really isn't supported by the data.
Grading items is such a subjective approach. AI grading could offer a more objective and less biased methodology.
Its not controversial with vintage and it can make sense. Its more controversial with modern, which is happening.
PSA should start documenting why a card got a certain grade.
Why it got x grade instead of a 10.
The lack of information from PSA after grading is laughable in this day and age.
This is such a weird video that seems informative on the surface, but you cannot conclude anything because you do not have one key piece of data. You don't have any data on total number of copies of each of these cards that were graded in that same timeframe. How does the ratio of total cards graded to total new 10s stack up?
I agree, I wish we had that data (it's not available anywhere that I'm aware of). However, the point was to show that PSA hasn't just stopped giving 10s, which many were claiming after my previous video. The populations for even the most difficult cards are still increasing . . . but yes, it would be more insightful if we could see how Gem Rates have changed over time.
I think PSA have just changed their grading standards, that's all
Fair enough.
Im really worried! I started opening my collection even started a channel to save the experience, all in order to have the cards graded as an investment. All of mine are modern, mainly chasing SIR full arts. I just got to the point i have 20 ready to get graded all around 60-120$ if psa10. But if they dont get tens im screwed. $350 estimate to grade. Are there any other grading companies people respect or that holds value? Please help.
Are you hoping to sell them or just preserving them for your own collection? Most grading companies charge between $10-20 per card. PSA has the best resale value, but CGC has (in my opinion) a better looking slab and is a little cheaper at $11 per card.
I had no idea PSA was grading over 14 million cards a year, crazy
Over 8 million were TCG, with the majority of those being Pokemon.
@ I really thought it would have been sports cards, with all the variants and rookies.
I think card 'cleaning' has blown up in the 2020's
I would say pokemon cards wasn't graded much back then vs now ....
Whatnot caused mass vintage pack openings therefore more 10s
Maybe . . . buying pack fresh cards was easy and inexpensive prior to 2016. I bought hundreds of WOTC holos and even straight out of the pack many were cursed with factory printing issues. I was also much more selective on which cards I sent, since anything below a PSA 9 would typically lose money. Most 1st Edition PSA 8 WOTC holos were difficult to move and sold for less than $20 in those days. I do agree that pack breaks have and will continue to unearth more potential 10's .
This video holds zero value when it comes to arguing population control. All you have shown is that cards have continued to be graded and some of those were 10's which increased the population of PSA 10's. The evidence that needs to be shown isn't how many 10's were added; we need to see how many of that specific card were graded and of those, the % that were 10's AND has has that % gone down or up or stagnated over the years.
I agree, but (to the best of my knowledge) there is no way to track submission volume over time . . . I've been looking all-over for such data! The point was to show that PSA 10's haven't just stopped, which was a prevalent (and inaccurate) counter-claim many were arguing after my previous video.
Biggest problem with your theory is u forgot how many ppl got into or back into pokemon during covid and those who didn't constantly saw the prices and their friends doing it so they got into it ur doing this video at basically height of popularity and as prices go up the more cards are sent for grading I don't think psa can handle the volume and can't spend proper amount of time needed to give a card a solid grade biggest tell of this is gamestop some ppl are getting their cards back in 3 weeks 21 days is too fast of a turnaround time in my opinion not enough time for cards to be inspected properly
Grading companies are a literal scam i have quite literally had a card with a crease VISIBLE through the slab grade 1 step below perfect.
Its who has the biggest account with PSA, when I was collecting int the past, I submitted Yugioh cards and one out of 12 cards came back a PSA 10 ... I'm no grader but I had a microscope, magnifier and scanner to make sure the cards were worth grading. Its the big accounts that spend tens of thousands of dollars that get PSA 10's but it is what it is.
So, you're claim is that the more cards submitted, the more cards receive 10's? First, your experience of 12 cards is far too small to draw any conclusions, especially if it was only one submission with one grader. Second, it's self-evident that submitting thousands of cards would net more 10's than submitting 12 cards . . . unless your suggesting that the volume submitters receive a higher percentage of 10's.
@@pokemon_classics The guy also didn't mention or say if he tried those 12 cards with another submission/account. Just cause he sent 12 cards in, that doesn't mean any will 10. I could send 100 NM cards that aren't gem mint (none will 10 rightfully so). Idk if its people who just submit 20 cards and get mad that none 10 and want to blame PSA for their lack of pregrading skills.. it's not about percentages even when a card has a 4-20% gem rate.
@@pokemon_classics No im claiming the bigger the bank roll you have with a grading company the better the odds are in PSA 10s. then the average joe
Is this population control? No, in the sense that they're not intentionally controlling specific cards to limit the population. They don't really have any reason to do that - especially because of how their upcharging works. Their standards and regulations have evolved over the years. A 10 now is on average much more "perfect" than a 10 from 2015. However I would assume that a S&V card would be looked at this less scrutiny than a WOTC era card, not only because of how much more the grade impacts the price, but also because S&V baseline quality is lower (for English at least). Like for example it's possible a PSA 10 S&V card is closer to a WOTC era 9. That doesn't mean it's population control, it means that what's "perfect" is relative. Like I don't think the number of Van Gogh Pika's getting 10's is some witchcraft, I think they put a lot of extra resources into making sure a card that would be handed out in the same building as a Mona Lisa would be basically perfect.
Thank you! This is essentially my position also. I don't think PSA has changed their standards for vintage; however, they are more thorough and intentional now. As a result, fewer obvious overgrades are able to slip through.
You dont need to explain yourself dude. Youre good
I appreciate that. It's a nuanced topic, and I don't want to be misunderstood.
AI grading needs to take over. TAG
I actually donnave the technology to build and automatic AI who does the grading for you at 99.99% accuracy should I start this idea? I mean how many people are really gonna be grading at a place that has no recognition
This is one of the few jobs I wouldnt mind being taken over by robots. Humans suck at this job ð
Money laundering basically ð
Pokemon aint fun anymore. Its a pyramid scheme like crypto
Crack some vintage 10s and resubmit them. Get your data from that. ð
100% this lol
What I donât understand is how I can open a brand new pack from a sealed tin or similar product that has the plastic insert to prevent the pack from shifting, pull a card in pristine condition, send it in with the proper protection, and have it come back as anything less than a 10 (assuming the centering etc is perfect) which has happened MULTIPLE times
I submitted at the wrong time sounds about right jeez
for the amount of cards that go through psa to only have 2 kangaskhan over 2 years HOW THE FUK isnt that control there isnt no way
You're right, that doesn't seem probable. However, in any given data set there are going to be outliers in both directions. Having an average of over 18% population increases for the most difficult to grade cards, seems reasonable. It is strange that all three Jungle holos on this list are substantially below that average though.
Professional
Scam
Artists
Hahaha! Nice.
Professional
Speculative
Assets
ð
Just sent the sunbreon out with gamestop to psa hoping for a 10
This is becoming a money pyramid scheme.
PokÃĻmon ain't fun anymore. Its a money laundry like crypto.
None of this matters if you aren't tracking how many cards of each are being graded vs how many are getting 10s. Saying they're doing population control w/o talking about how many of each have been graded is dumb asf
That data is not available anywhere (to the best of my knowledge), so it's not dumb, it's merely making use of what is available. Previously, people were arguing that PSA stopped giving 10's entirely for certain vintage cards. This video was responding to that criticism; clearly they are still giving 10's . . . quite a few actually. I agree though, it would be more valuable to track Gem Rates over time, but the data needed isn't available to do so.
*in caveman voice* psa bad, i deserve 10âs
I buy psa 8&9 and crack then resubmit, you would be shocked at how may come back as a 10.
Not surprised I out right buy psa10s and sell my raw now
Wouldn't you say that people getting more 10s is due tue fact that there are a lot of products out there (polish, rags,vacun machine, humity box, tool ,etc) help so people achieve more 10s on vintage? ðĪ honest question here. Thanks for the cool video! ððž
I assume that would factor in, but I have no data to suggest how much (if any) card cleaning contributes.
@@pokemon_classics true ðĪ it's not really something that can be easily tracked same goes for re submissions. Thanks for the responseððž and happy new year! ðĨģ
Great video dude! Great data on those increases in PSA 10's! I think one thing you have to also consider is the comparison of the increase in PSA 10's with the amount of that specific card submitted for grading during that period of time. Just using easy numbers here, but if there were only 5 Yanma submitted for grading during that time, then it wouldn't be as surprising that the PSA 10 population did not increase. However, compare that to the Lugia and lets say 500 Lugia's were submitted then it would be a little suspicious if only 1 was given a 10. I have a feeling that the increase in PSA 10 population correlates well with the increase in overall population.
Exactly my thought! Just looking at the % increase in number of PSA 10s makes no sense.
The correlation between submitted cards and PSA 10 results is the relevant stat!
I agree, I wish we had that data (it's not available anywhere that I'm aware of). However, the point was to show that PSA hasn't just stopped giving 10s, which many were claiming after my previous video. The populations for even the most difficult cards are still increasing . . . but yes, it would be more insightful if we could see how Gem Rates have changed over time.
Iâd imagine that the gem rates go down over time because less and less are getting ripped. And because the older the raw cards are then the more likely they get damaged over time
good 10s should be the best of the best and maybe theyre tightening whats considered a 10 to start repairing their rough reputation and maybe they instituted ai. now if theyre doing it just because then thats a problem. imo we should be told exactly why it failed a 10 rating.
They have a "Grader Notes" feature justifying grades . . . you have to pay extra for it though. I agree with you though, that should be provided automatically with the grading service.
Card doctors ...the end
Just use ags. Its ai graded. Much better quality than psa.
Had a nm slowking 1st Ed I submitted and it came back as a 6 they are definitely controlling the population
AGS or any ai grading co is the best way to grade
Look at 1980 Topps Rickey Henderson for another example.
Grading is a scam
Told you ð
Psa was always a scam and any grade 10 is worth less then any common card in a binder. What an ugly case.
Brother didn't you just make this video
You didn't watch it, did you? It's a follow-up video responding to some of the comments and questions people had. I pulled and presented a bunch of population data in this video showing how the cards that are most difficult to grade have increased in populations over the last few years.
nice clickbait title again just like your last video.
isnt this vid very similar to the one posted yesterday? hmmm
You didn't watch it, did you? It's a follow-up video responding to some of the comments and questions people had. I pulled and presented a bunch of population data in this video showing how the cards that are most difficult to grade have increased in populations over the last few years.
That fact people think PSA is pop controlling cards is insane
not really